A Tibetan Blogger Writes on Nationalism

posted Sep 14, 2015, 7:58 PM by The Tibetan Political Review

By Lag, published in English by High Peaks Pure Earth (August 27, 2015)

High Peaks Pure Earth presents the English translation of an
online essay on the subject of nationalism by a Tibetan blogger who
calls himself “Lag” (vulture). The article was written on April 15, 2015
and posted on his blog on korawa.com on May 1, 2015.

“Lag” uses the term མི་རིགས་རིང་ལུགས། (mirigs ring lugs) in
Tibetan for nationalism and his musings, also social commentary, call to
mind the writings of other young Tibetan thinkers who write on large
topics, bloggers such as Buddha and Shokjang.

Thank you to Palden Gyal for the translation from Tibetan to English.

There is this prevalent assumption that we are familiar with or
understand what ‘nationalism’ in our society is. The birth of the term
‘nationalism’ occurred recently in its ideological development, but I
think the concept itself is quite ancient. Since we are always fond of
engaging in talks related to “nationalism,” the idea has become prosaic,
and it has unwittingly entered into our ‘general knowledge’ without
much discussion or deliberation. As a consequence, for most people, the
idea of nationalism has become a ruler of discernment, and they maintain
it with a virtue of strict and uncompromising outlook.

Regardless of race or ethnicity, nationalism has a force of
intensifying sentiments. It carries an acute sense of discernment and a
high degree of moral authority. This moral authority facet of the
ideology assists people in establishing and validating their
perspectives and positions. Such views and visions of nationalism have
led to and created many circumstances of divergence or convergence in
many societies. To recount an example from recent history of China, why
did the Communists (CPC) and the Nationalists (KMT) confront each other
even after their supposed resolution? The chief reason for the conflict
and clash between the nationalists and communists was nationalism. Both
Mao Zedong and Chiang Kai-shek were committed individuals who had
different visions for the future of China, cherishing distinct views of
nationalism. Nationalism has this rare power of convergence as well as
divergence.

If we look back and critically examine our own history, we realize
that just as Lhalung Paldor’s assassination of Emperor Lang-Darma was
for Tibet, the latter’s destruction and demolition of Buddhism was also
in the name of saving the Tibetan Empire – weren’t they driven by yet
conflicting views for the Tibetan Empire? In retrospect, Sakya Pandita’s
surrender to the Tardars, Ganden Phodrang’s deployment of Mongol
soldiers into Tibet, Ditsang Parthur’s persecution by Nga-Lam-Jar-Sum
(three ministers during the time of the Seventh Dalai Lama) or their own
downfall, Lungshar’s deprivation of sight or Reting’s reason behind the
removal of Lungshar’s eyeballs, Phunwang’s motivation behind leading
the way of the red Communists into Tibet or Takdrak’s protest against
it, even the so-called “ten-virtues” movement in Serthar or for that
matter those who support and sustain the idea that Amdowas are not
Tibetan, all of these were and are founded on this faint idea of nation
and nationalism. Logically, one must wonder: what is Bhod and who are
real Bhodpas?

Thus the word “Bhod” (Tibet) is a curious term. If the expression
Bhod is a box, everything could be deposited or dumped into it. For
instance, just like anyone can declare and name anyone an enlightened
being, different objects and articles of significance have been put into
this box, and there is some degree of elasticity to this conceptual
box. Sometimes this box can accommodate a multiplicity of “things” and
other times it can house only few. But it has never departed the
prudence of and profit for some individuals or group of individuals,
while the multitude invariably bewitched and beguiled by a language of
political trickery. As a consequence, the river of Tibetan history is
punctuated, directed and driven by conflicting views of nationalism and
all in the name of the nation. Our history also bears witness to the
double-edged characteristic of nationalism – the contradictory yet
possible good and bad elements of the ideology.

These days we come across a growing number of Lamas, Tulkus or lay
individuals who claim to do this and that, organize activities or preach
certain codes of conduct in the name of Bhod. Some even publicly accept
their acts of theft and robbery and demonstratively claim to have
established this or that for Bhod, while others express their conviction
and courage to kill or die for Bhod. Many of these restless minds seem
to discipline and conduct their lives according to what they see as
proper and prudent for and in the name of Bhod. But, what is this “for
Bhod” actually mean and who is this for ultimately? Examine it closely
and truthfully. Is it for a short-lived profit of your own? Is it for an
idea or an activity that you are involved in? Is it something related
to your birthplace? In short, are you not yourself Bhod? If not, is your
birthplace Bhod? Oh, “nationalists”!

Everybody seems to be very fond of talking or listening to people
about nationalism. Some contend and question the necessity of
nationalism, but that is not useful. It seems quite an inextricable
ideology. Under the banner of nationalism, some wholeheartedly uphold
and commit to a certain ideals, while others in the name of Bhod or
religion engage in numerous activities for personal profit and power.
This idea or the word “Bhod” has become almost an instrument or a weapon
of those self-seeking individuals or groups. I do not hold that
nationalism is an entirely detrimental and damaging ideology, but I
protest against the uncritical eye that receives everything done in the
name of Bhod or under the banner of patriotism without discernment and
deliberation. When we think and talk about nationalism, we must not
forget to locate and revise nationalists and nationalism and the history
of the political ideology in the greater world history. We must
recollect the birth of National Socialism in Nazi German as a
nationalist ideological movement and its architect, Adolf Hitler.

Originally published at: http://highpeakspureearth.com/2015/a-tibetan-blogger-writes-on-nationalism/